Givenchy Haute Couture S/S 2019 Paris

[Perickles]

It's like a boring Valentino.

 

[tricotineacetat]

Funny enough, I think what some perceive to be soulless and clinical is exactly what I find appealing about this collection - I find it refreshing to see a couture collection that lacks completely a sense of cuteness, girlishness and romance in favor of sharp, surgical lines. I am not at all convinced of her menswear vision, but maybe it's part of the reason why her womenswear has that androgynous sharpness and restraint that somehow makes me think of Tom Ford's work in the late 90ies and early 00s at Gucci and YSL.

 

[rip_ian curtis]

I disagree with most here. To me her Givenchy and Chanel (and maybe sometimes Adeline André and Iris) are the only ones who can put together a couture collection that makes a clear distinction between rtw and haute couture. You can somehow just tell by looking at it that this is real Haute Couture, and not just expensive RTW. Same with Chanel couture. There’s a sense of higher style and manufacturing present.

All the others present, in my opinion, glitzy and glamourous ready-to-wear. No matter if they were made by hand and abide by the rules, it’s just somehow not distinguishable enough from what modern RTW can do. They are lacking something, a finesse and lightness perhaps.

Gaultier and Galliano on the other hand belong to some different category. I see JPG as more stage costume these days, and John at Margiela is more like textile art or concept design. I don’t see them as Haute Couture collections.

 

[Deleted member 130879]

I find that first blazer to be a dream and it almost saves the rest of the collection. It's so simple and so perfect and so contrary to all the campiness of this HC season! I wish she had gone into the sleek and chic route that you see in that first look (and the men's).

 

[HeatherAnne]

Let's not pretend like any house does haute couture all that well anymore.

This is not edgy, it's not stunning, so I admit, it's not all that great. But it's far from bad. I feel like she's building a cohesive brand identity, and that matters more than anything right now. It wasn't long ago Givenchy sold its soul and was being worn by trashy reality/pop stars. She's elevated it back to a polished, sexy, Parisian brand. Not too many houses out there for chic women -- plenty out there for girly girls, teenagers, stuffy women, those still caught up in the overly seriousness advant garde of the Yohji/JPG/Rick Owens days. I'll take Clare's Givenchy all day, every day.

 

[YohjiAddict]

I liked the idea of it more than I liked the clothes themselves, as
tricotineacetat mentioned this is the type of couture that I would be interested in watching: Austere, modern and precise. In the end, the execution is not really up to par but I did get what she was trying to achieve, for me there are some great dresses but that's about it in the end.

 

[Ken Doll Jenner]

I would defend Clare's Givenchy any day but this has got to be the worst offering since her debut. There were some interesting cuts here and there, but, as addressed by several users here, she's not confident enough with her proposition hence the unnecessary embellishments. The look on Adut should've been the aesthetic du jour for the whole collection, but instead, she gave us Raf's Calvin Klein rip-off through those hideous fringe numbers, a poor attempt at rejuvenating the fetishistic spirit of Dior RTW 2003's latex looks, and a sad idea of introducing a couture It Bag with those hideous bow-attached backpacks. She needs to stop trying too hard to be edgy and let her penchant for tailoring shine through because her strength lies there.

 

[GivenchyHomme]

I don't necessarily think she's a bad designer, she's simply at the wrong house. Haute Couture is a completely different thought process from RTW. Rather than presenting an Idea in a conceptual and beautiful way she goes straight to the point and gives us something obvious and easy to wear. Obvious is a good word to describe her. Overall there is no fantasy, no risks, and no imagination. I've said numerous time's that she's over her head and that has not changed one bit.

 

[tricotineacetat]

I don't necessarily think she's a bad designer, she's simply at the wrong house. Haute Couture is a completely different thought process from RTW. Rather than presenting an Idea in a conceptual and beautiful way she goes straight to the point and gives us something obvious and easy to wear. Obvious is a good word to describe her. Overall there is no fantasy, no risks, and no imagination. I've said numerous time's that she's over her head and that has not changed one bit.

Then again, isn't Chanel doing exactly that with their couture - Being in a direct dialogue with and for the customer, their needs and their lifestyle? I think what Clare Waight-Keller is trying to do goes back to actually making clothes that are practical and meaningful for the kind of customer that buys couture to have in their lives rather than to do it just for the sake of prestige and PR - Whether or not it actually works out is another thing altogether, but it's quite clear to me she is not a flights-of-fancy designer like Galliano, I never expected that even from her.

 

[Lola701]

Then again, isn't Chanel doing exactly that with their couture - Being in a direct dialogue with and for the customer, their needs and their lifestyle? I think what Clare Waight-Keller is trying to do goes back to actually making clothes that are practical and meaningful for the kind of customer that buys couture to have in their lives rather than to do it just for the sake of prestige and PR - Whether or not it actually works out is another thing altogether, but it's quite clear to me she is not a flights-of-fancy designer like Galliano, I never expected that even from her.

Riccardo was doing that in a more strong way. What he did for Couture had more authority than this.
On the contrary, I think that her Couture has a kind of PR thing going on.

I think the problem with Givenchy is that it’s very difficult to picture a clientele in those clothes. I think that Riccardo had his clientele which was more attached to his vision than to the brand.

Chanel is different. Karl has preserved the codes of Coco since the beginning. Yes over the decade he has done crazy, ridiculous, extravagant and just pure classic but each season a client knows that she will find her suit of the season with an evening gown or a cute cocktail dress.

 

[GivenchyHomme]

Then again, isn't Chanel doing exactly that with their couture - Being in a direct dialogue with and for the customer, their needs and their lifestyle? I think what Clare Waight-Keller is trying to do goes back to actually making clothes that are practical and meaningful for the kind of customer that buys couture to have in their lives rather than to do it just for the sake of prestige and PR - Whether or not it actually works out is another thing altogether, but it's quite clear to me she is not a flights-of-fancy designer like Galliano, I never expected that even from her.

No. Chanel is Chanel. It’s timeless elegance. The difference in quality is night and day. Clare has not taken advantage of the fact that she has such incredible artisans at her fingertips. She feels content with presenting mediocre collections that will age poorly. In 20 years a Chanel Haute Couture look will hold its value as a collectors piece whereas Givenchy by Clare will be a faded memory. I give her at least another 5 years tops. What makes her Couture any more special or interesting than her RTW? You can easily buy high quality clothing off the rack to suit your needs and lifestyle at a much lower cost. Are you pleased with such vapid and soulless clothing that you had to feel the need to come here and defend it? For what it costs I expect more love and imagination. Even the most basic look at Chanel is more interesting, chic, and timeless compared to Givenchy. She had her moment with Meghan Markle and even that dress was terrible. Clare is lucky she has the power of LVMH on her side, without it Givenchy would be another basic and forgettable brand.

 

[squilliam]

Just like Raf was at Dior, she just doesn't understand how to utilize the skilled artisans and make couture. This really just looks like a cleaner RTW collection, and compared to Tisci's white couture collections of the past, this is incredibly dull and could be from some random lesser designer's couture collection.Her last collection I felt had some execution issues along with being directionless and dull, this one is better but it's still not very good. I like that she brought some class back to the house and ditched the Insta crowd, and she does seem to take her job seriously unlike her predecessor. But I don't think her aesthetic works for the codes of this house, it looks like she's really trying but it's just not working out so far